I second this. I don't think you've "brought shame" on anyone. Despite the negativity of the experience, it was told openly and honestly for others to learn from and that is the commendable part.
While this may be true, I think the reasons behind the punch were what elicited seemingly positive responses. While no one has flat out said they condone hitting another person regardless of the reason, everyone can understand and empathize with a woman who was faced with a man about to leave with her child. This is also a "gendered response" because we are empathizing with the "mama bear" reaction and assuming the father would not protect his child just as fiercely in the same situation. However, I would like to think that, if DS told a story where a woman was attempting to take his child away and he physically stopped her, he may not get "hugs and love" (A GC man would likely get a fist bump gif before getting hugs and love no matter the topic) but usernames would not immediately criminalize him either.

Exactly.

I would add "should not protect" to the "would not protect."

I don't think we disagree on the larger point that I am making. I will just add:

A GC man who hit the mother of his child to keep her from leaving with the child (rhetorical question: How often do women threaten to leave, or actually leave, with the children?) would probably be told in a loving/brofist/"we aren't judging you and thanks for your honesty" way that he should have just called the police.

No one in this thread justified (we empathize and sympathize) what happened with IrishLake and IrishLake is thankful that it was a learning experience on both sides. Yet and still, remember what people said earlier in this thread about the different ways that abuse manifests and how abuse starts off small and initially seems explanable and understandable, etc.? The different ways that abuse manifests tends to be applied to man-on-woman abuse whereas woman-on-man abuse is often seen as "it must have happened for a GOOD reason...it won't happen again because the initial problem has been solved."

As evidenced by the beginning of your post:

Yep.

See: Chris Brown. Even after repeated apologies and saying that he's learned from the experience, he is still demonized by many people.

*This is not me condoning his actions.

I completely agree. Rihanna came out of this scot-free, but I think there had to be a DAMN good reason for him to put both of their lives in jeopardy in that car.

Now -- I would never hit a woman. Ever. However, some women* take advantage of that and come at men with the "Whatchu gon' do? Hit me? I wish you would! Try it. I wish you would!"

Say that enough times and you'll find someone who will take you up on your offer.

ETA: Women aren't the only ones taking advantage.

Absolutely. I don't condone it, and as others have observed, ultimately things like when they had sex, who said what/did what to whom become relevant. Dealing with these issues is often very personal, and like I said, it's often the case that both parties are in the wrong.

And it's those cases where both parties are in the wrong that I find the law (at least in Oklahoma) doesn't seem to have an adequate remedy. Often, it's the first person to talk to the police or the first person to get to the courthouse to file for a victim's protection order (VPO) (think restraining order for a victim of domestic violence).

In Oklahoma, the standard for awarding a VPO is pretty low, just that there has been domestic violence, stalking, harassment, dropping off of items at the victim's home, etc. And to go along with that, in the divorce arena, if the court finds there's domestic violence (and it often does in a he-said/she-said context), then there's an automatic presumption that the complaining party should get custody of the child. It's a great way to gain a leg up in a custody proceeding and is abused all the time.

On the civil end, I've both prosecuted and defended these actions and in the majority of the cases, I think the statute is being misused and that there should be a more adequate remedy. Treating one party as the "victim" and the other as aggressor, which is usually a distinction based on gender, is often a wholly inadequate means to tackle this issue in the courtroom context.

Exactly. I knew a man whose crazy wife used to get angry and mess with the steering wheeling, the car key, and attempt to place the car in something other than drive when they were driving on the highway with their child in the backseat. He said it took everything in him to not punch the shit out of her for the safety of everyone in the car. Thankfully, he was able to smack her hands out the way and beg her to stop. He waited until they got home and he finally filed for divorce. The things is, guess who got custody of the child? Not the father because he apparently could not prove that she was an unfit parent. Guess who would have possibly been arrested had the wife been punched and the police been called? In most jurisdictions, the husband or both of them. I wonder what would have happened if he had not punched her but called the police because she was behaving dangerously on the highway.

It is beyond frustrating. It's maddening. It's very, very hard. I no longer do this work because I couldn't take it. Aspiring lawyers often imagine a fight of good vs. evil. There are cases like that. Then sometimes it's evil vs. evil, or psycho self-destruction vs. evil.

A lot of mental health workers say their least favorite patients are the ones with borderline personality disorder. They have a diabolical genius for driving other people berserk. A lot of victims of domestic violence have this condition, and it makes it so hard to represent their interests. They will come up with the most creative ways to sabotage your work.

not an attorney, but a law librarian that worked in the county courthouse for 5 years. dealing with DV and everything associated with it was one of the main reasons for my burnout. ESPECIALLY seeing the same people over and over and each partner continually trying to "outdo" the other.

It made it really hard (for *me*) to be appropriately sensitive after a certain point. colleagues l lovingly joke that law school students are demanding... i say piece of cake compared to john q. public!

Borderline Personality Disorder is a terrible condition that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. That said, I've heard that when men are being abused by their female partners, the women often have heavy borderline traits (if they're not diagnosed BPD). The highs are super-high, and the lows are abysmal. They're often substance abusers. The men don't want to leave their kids but know that their wives are manipulative enough to do certain things to get custody. The stories out there are terrible.

This is what I said. I don't condone him hitting her by any stretch of the imagination but that does not stop me from wondering what she was doing at the time. Her actions are some of the many things that happened in that car that the public does not know. Unfortunately, when many people hear "there's lots of stuff we don't know," it equals "she might also be at fault" which equals "she deserved what she got." Which equaled me getting called lots of interesting names when I said "there's lots of stuff we don't know." People tend to demonize those who refuse to or are hesitant to demonize the abuser--an effect of that idea of "there's only one victim and one abuser and you MUST choose a side."

I also know that "I was doing it to protect her from hurting herself" is a pretty popular excuse for men after using physical force on a woman when really she was putting no one in danger. However, it is almost impossible to prove if that's true one way or the other without witnesses. No clue if it's true, but I read a good deal of what went down between Chris and Rihanna happened after the car was already pulled over. Would that change how the whole ordeal is viewed? Would that change if he also had bruises all over him and those pictures were splashed across tabloids?

I'm having flashbacks of that video of the McDonald's employee beating an irate female customer with a crowbar! Did she "deserve" it? No...but in this society, where many, many people are teetering on the edge of sanity, it is NOT smart to start screaming "DO SOMETHIN! DO SOMETHIN!" 2 inches from someone's face...

OT, but I just thought of that...Actually kind of on topic, since violence by women is escalating, and is bound to translate as an increase of women AS batterers.

I remember that. She jumped on the counter and into the kitchen area. Did she think they were NOT going to try to contain her? Unfortunately, she confronted the wrong individual.

I think most people only think about DV as male on female due to the large number of campaigns like "Real men beat eggs" and "To violence against women, _______ says no."

There aren't many campaigns that focus on all aspects of DV

My former roommate was in an abusive relationship with her girlfriend prior to her moving in with us. DV within same-sex relationships is extremely underreported; and there are a few factors for this--financial dependence is a huge issue, far more than I would have expected it to be.

I would be interested in discussing how same-sex DV is ignored or hidden. I'm super glad we got past the "just leave" nonsense earlier.

I'd just like to say that this has been an awesome conversation!